5년단임 대통령제의 명암과 정부형태 개헌의 방향

Abstract

The greatest achievement of the 5-year term presidency under the 1987 Constitution, which was the product of the June Democracy Movement, was breaking the cycle of dictatorship that had persisted since the enactment of the 1948 Constitution. The isolation from the era of dictatorship became an important foundation for abolishing the legacy of authoritarianism that had taken root throughout Korean society. The 1987 Constitution has had a profound impact on the political, economic, social, and cultural spheres. Since 1987, South Korea has experienced four regime changes, and democracy has matured. Transparency in society as a whole has improved through systems such as disclosure of public officials' assets, real-name financial transaction system, and confirmation hearings for public appointments. The elimination of authoritarianism has also had a positive impact on the economy and culture, leading to economic development and the growth of the cultural industry. As the era of state capitalism comes to an end, global companies are emerging in South Korea, and the era of censorship comes to an end, South Korea's cultural industry has begun to gain global influence.
 Despite the clear achievements of the 5-year term presidency under the 1987 Constitution, there are also significant issues that need to be addressed. These include corruption and malfeasance among the President's inner circle, the damage caused by excessive concentration of power in the hands of the President, the incompetence of the President, problems in the relationship between the President and the National Assembly due to issues in election cycles, and political polarization caused by factional leadership conflicts.
 I would like to propose a Korean-style presidentialism as a constitutional amendment to solve these problems. Specifically, the term of office of the president elected by a runoff vote shall be changed to a four-year mid-term system, but the election cycle shall be adjusted to elect members in half in the early general elections and mid-term elections, respectively. This would give citizens the opportunity to evaluate the President and the National Assembly through two parliamentary elections. Introducing a vice-presidential system could lead to new problems, so it is preferable to maintain the Prime Ministerial system, but if the National Assembly has the power to recommend the Prime Minister, they could play an active role in the appointment of the Prime Minister every two years, in the event of an opposition party victory in a parliamentary election. This could also enable the formation of a coalition government between the ruling and opposition parties. In addition, it is necessary to reduce the President's authority to appoint constitutional officials and to expand the influence of the National Assembly.